Discussions

corona_coder wrote:


With Dell pushing Ubuntu hardware and software developers will be porting to Ubuntu.  if they dont their business will die.  Linux is the future people need to get used to it.  Ubuntu is the future of computing.

Pushing?  Oh dear, I think you've been badly mis-informed.

Dell won't be 'pushing' Linux over Windows - far from it.  Windows will still be the primary operating system of choice for Dell - and most users who go on to the Dell site buying a PC will end up with Windows unless they explicity seek out and choose Linux.

Will Dell be sinking their own time and money into developing the OS image for factory preload?  Probably not - they'll most like be relying heavily on Canonical for that.
Well Dell be sinking their own time and money into setting up a full Linux support department for people who have bought their PCs?  Again, probably not.

Dell know their market, and they know that most consumers and businesses will want Windows on their PCs, be it for the age old FUD of 'lock-in' or simply because people don't want to spend the time re-learning a new OS - the fact that Dell are offering Linux as a factory option, is not a Windows-killer.

Dell are doing this to play into supposed 'demand' that their ide-storm site indicated to them, but lets not forget that such sites have been heavily targeted by Linux proponents such as those who frequent Slashdot - which has most likely given seriously skewed results to Dell, who I predict will quikckly learn that the demand for Linux is actually pretty small.

A whole huge combination of factors will have to come into play for Linux to topple Windows on the desktop - factory pre-load may be one of those factors - but it's not a major one, not at all.

fdisk wrote:

Dell picks Ubuntu for Linux PCs 
Are you going to buy one? Will this begin to turn the tide of the industry? Yes, I know Dell has tried this before, but market conditions are continually changing.

No, and No.

Having seen a friend wrestle with the supposedly 'easy to use' Ubuntu, I'm not impressed, and find it incredible that anyone would dare to suggest that Linux is in any way 'ready for Grandma'.

I presume Dell will be farming out Tech support to Canonical?  If I were Dell I certainly wouldn't want to sink money into setting up a support deparment for an unproven market.

--
Badgerguy

Sven Groot wrote:


It would exclude things like speech recognition and other accessibility software though that simulate user actions for good reasons.

And it would make the nay-sayers go "M$ forces people to buy new keyboards".

Not necessarily - software that simulates input could in itself be protected with DRM, and interact with windows TPM systems.

As for the nay-sayers - well, the nay-sayers say nay to Microsoft in whatever they do, so it's not really a concern to me!  Ultimately allot of UAC popups occur because the OS can't tel the difference between a 'simulated' input or action, or a user command that it is genuinely coming from the user by mouse click, or keystroke.  A way needs to be found to fix it.

W3bbo wrote:

Whilst an interesting idea, it wouldn't play well with the existing user-input architecture in Windows (or any other OS)..

Oh definately - but it could be 'phased in' pretty easily.  The reward for anyone with a TPM based PC with TPM based input devices would be the option of having fewer annoying UAC prompts.

As for other platforms - well, it depends on whether such a system would err on the side of security with TPM keyboards and mice ONLY working with a TPM enabled system - or, you could simply have a physical switch on the devices to turn TPM on or off.

nlondon wrote:

I don't think the type of actions UAC is intended to protect you from is clicking a "Corrupt System Now" button... it is to protect you from clicking the innocent looking "Check for Updates Now" button in an untrusted app that is maliciously designed to corrupt your system.  Just because you clicked it doesn't mean you should have clicked it.

Preciesly why I quantified it by saying it should only apply to trusted software.  Any application could try to do something at the click of a mouse - but only trusted software (ie software that can be verified to have been: a) installed with approval, and b) not tampered with since installation amongst other criteria), should be able to do things that are administrative tasks at the command of the user.

Not to mention that UAC could still be turned 'fully on' as it is now - it needn't be an either /or thing.

I've been using Vista for a while now, and to get a feel for it - I've left UAC on.

This is a good thing, right?  Well, no, because UAC is pretty annoying - a fact that becomes pretty clear given that most lists of 'Tips and Tricks' for Vista out on the net usually include the instructions for turning UAC off somewhere near the top.

The problem I see with UAC is it pops up usually to simply confirm a mouse click - I double click on a management console icon for example - and up pops a UAC prompt asking for confirmation.

So how is it that we have DRM technology that can protect content going out through the soundcard and even beyond, but we don't have any kind of DRM technology in keyboards and mice that might allow the OS to ensure that an initiated action is one being carreid out by the user with their input devices, and not by a malicious program or script?

If DRM was built into input devices, UAC could pop up allot less, not having to basically confirm mouse clicks on trusted software (such as microsoft's own built in consoles and control panels) - and allowing for three different levels of UAC: Off, On for untrusted software, and on for all actions.

Thoughts?

Microsoft; Please here my tale of woe with Windows Vista, and music bought from the MSN Music Store in the UK.

In short - technical support for MSN Music UK have told me that the music I have bought from the store - a Microsoft branded store - will not run on Windows Vista.  The only solution?  Support have instructed me to crack the DRM - yes, that's right, the recommended solution is for me to take the music to an XP system, burn it to disk, and then rip it back.

Want to know more?  Read on.

Over a period of several years, I've been buying quite a bit of music from MSN Music UK - (not the same as the US store, which is now closed).  This service is provided by OD2 (On Demand Distribution), a LoudEye company, which also offers over 60 music stores in various coutries, mostly in Europe.  Nevertheless - it is a Microsoft branded store, and of course, Microsoft will have some kind of agreement with OD2, and will be taking some of the money.

I've over 150 tracks - a modest collection by some standards I'm sure, but nevertheless - I paid for every one of them legally, using the MSN Music store.

Recently, I had the opportunity to install Windows Vista RTM at home.  I jumped at the chance, and decided to dive in at the deep end, and moved over completely, transferring my files - including my music.

When I got up and running, I tried playing one of my purchased tracks.  Of course, as I was now on a completely different setup of Windows - Windows Media Player (11), needed to refetch the license from the licensing server at OD2.  It popped up with a small web-page dialog, provided by the OD2's systems, asking for my username and password - which I put in.  The page simply reloaded, asking for my details again.  No matter how many times I put my credentials in - the page simply reloads, with no error message.

Before we start re-covering the obvious - yes, it's the right username and password, since it's the same one that I can sucessfully use to log on to the MSN Music Store's main home page, and if I enter incorrect details on purpose, I get an 'invalid username / password' error that I don't see when I enter the correct information.

Of course, I contacted tech support - who replied telling me I need to reset my DRM folder, and gave me instructions on how to do this that seemed to be crafted to an XP system (despite me making it clear I was using Vista with WMP11).

After being taken through various troubleshooting steps, none of which solved the problem (and I followed them carefully, I assure you), I was eventually sent an email telling me that it is in the terms and conditions that the service is incompatible with Windows Vista (I can find nothing of the sort in the terms of service), and that if I want access to my music, I should take the tracks to a PC where the music does play, burn the tracks to CD, and then rip them back - essentially I was told to crack the DRM; which in itself is a violation of the terms of service!

I was pretty shocked at this.  All I'm trying to do is play music in Windows Media Format, on Windows Media Player, on Windows, purchased from a Microsoft branded store, protected using Microsoft's DRM systems - and it doesn't work.

I complained, and expressed my astonishment at their recommendation.  That was almost three weeks ago.  I received an email from escalated support, advising me to carry out a few steps that I'd allready done.  I replied back, but have heard nothing since on any email address I have for them.

Microsoft: do you know how badly the people providing your Music Store in the UK are handling support?  Are you aware of how underprepared they are for a new version of your flagship product?  I doubt it, hence in my frustration, I'm 'going public'.

Please - someone help me!  I'm happy to furnish anyone who needs it screenshots, screenvideos of the problem, and email logs.

Not sure of this has allready been posted, but RSS wiz Niall Kennedy, who only joined Microsoft a few months ago and joined the Windows Live efforts, has quit - and not in a good way

"Windows Live is under some heavy change, reorganization, pullback, and general paralysis and unfortunately my ability to perform, hire, and execute was completely frozen as well...If we had the resources I truly believe we could have tackled the number of users Hotmail, Messenger, Spaces, or even Internet Explorer might supply, and then ask for more by opening up the platform to the world...It's easier to get funding outside Microsoft than inside at the moment, so I am stepping out and doing my own thing."

The article has a small interview with Niall, in which he makes it clear that had Microsoft given him the resources he needed, he'd have stayed.

Is this a Microsoft employee throwing a tantrum, or a sign of a real management problem impacting the Windows Live teams? - I certainly hope not, because allot of the Windows Live stuff is pretty good IMHO.  Either way, frankly when the talent leaves, it's allot more concerning to those of us who use and promote technology than when a Manager or cheif-bigcheese leaves.  If Niall is all he's cracked up to be, then how have Microsoft let him slip away so soon?

Despite Mirosoft having taken allot of flak for Vista taking so long to get to market, some are actually calling for it to be delayed again.

Why?  Well, seems that an increasing number of those who want Windows Vista to be a good, stable release are saying that given the present beta and CTP releases, it just isn't going to be ready for the planned RTM date, and that if it is relased then, it won't up to standard.

Robert McLaws is saying it
>Paul Thurrott is saying it
Scoble is saying it

And these people aren't the 'anti-microsoft crowd'  They are generaly pro-windows people who usually defend Microsoft.

I haven't spent much time with the latest betas, so I can't comment directly, but I hope I'm right in thinking that most people will agree; to hell with shareholders, to hell with arbitrary shipment dates - the most damaging thing Microsoft could do is to release a buggy OS - release it only when it's good and ready!

julianbenjamin wrote:


I agree with ScanIAm; Thurrott is a troublemaker, jumping on the WGA-bashing bandwagon simply for the hits his site will get.

I don't think his article was complaining about his particular installation being hit, he was merely using it as an example to show people what the WGA screens look like.

What he does complain about though is the way that Microsoft put out a pre-release version of WGA on WindowsUpdate as a critical update, and not disclosing to people that it would 'phone home' on a frequent basis.

That's not jumping on a bandwagon, that's stating the bleeding obvious - and considering he is a tech journalist writing mostly about Windows, just exactly why shouldn't he?